Introduction:

The Karnataka High Court, affirming the right to live with dignity under Article 21, directed the registry to mask the name of an accused, acquitted of charges, in the court records. The court emphasized that even an acquitted individual has the right to be free from the shadow of crime, promoting the principles of “right to oblivion” and the “right to be forgotten.” This landmark decision underscores the importance of respecting an individual’s life and dignity, irrespective of past accusations.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The petitioner, previously charged under Sections 354A and 354B of the IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act, was discharged after a police ‘B’ report was accepted by the High Court. Despite the discharge, the petitioner’s name as an accused continued to affect his life adversely. The petitioner argued that the digital records hindered his employment opportunities and sought the masking of his name. The High Court’s counsel contended that such masking is permissible only for victims, not the accused, and acquitted status doesn’t warrant erasure of the accused’s name.

Court’s Judgement:

The Karnataka High Court, invoking the principles of the right to oblivion and right to be forgotten, emphasized the petitioner’s right to live with dignity. Referring to global practices and the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2018, the court recognized the need for an individual to control personal data, including its existence on the internet. The court directed the Registrar General to mask the petitioner’s name in digital records, clarifying that it doesn’t extend to police records. The decision sets a precedent for safeguarding the reputation and dignity of acquitted individuals.